http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/05/08/Olympus-Tough-TG1-iHS-rugged-waterproof-shockproof-12MP-compact-camera25-100mm F2 -4.9 (slow tele end...) shock/waterproof.So a faster and wider lens than the Pana ...will have to wait for some pics but it does have potentialA bit heavy at 7.8oz lets hope that the extra weight is there for a good reason..Franco

Only shooting around the pool and while on a river float trip. I won't be able to do technical optical testing until I return to Japan in September.

I think the camera puts out great jpegs. Excellent vivid colors, especially the famous "Olympus blue". AF is very fast/accurate even in relatively low light. GPS locks on well and the manometer is pretty cool. Suprisingly basic "lite" softmenu for an Oly btw. I think it will be an excellent no fuss, no hassle adventure camera.

I have the 40m underwater housing, FCON lens w/cla adapter and 40.5mm CP filter coming next week before I depart on the Bonaire dive trip. Looks to be a good digiscoping camera too if you are into that.

Smaller lenses (in size and aperture) is the case with the other cameras, however not (in aperture) with this one and that is why I typed that F2 in bold because it is about 4x brighter than some..(F2 lets 4x more light in than F4 , most compacts of this kind have a max aperture of 3.3 to 3.9) F2 means tha half of the available light hits the sensor, at F4 it is a quarter so it is F 1/2 or F1/4...As for the final image, (detail/sharpness/colours/exposure), that depends a lot on the sensor and the image processor the camera is using.So having the exact same lens and sensor but a different "engine" you get a different image(somewhat like people using Photoshop will get a different look starting with the same file)BTW, the optics don't protrude but travel internally (called folding optics). This is a Minolta patent. (most of those cameras are made by Sanyo now owned by Panasonic)Franco

Some day I'll have to replace it, although the current problem is just that the labels are wearing off the buttons, but I can figure it out. And there's a cover over the lens that opens up when I turn it on and sometimes it doesn't open. I think maybe it's F3.5.

One thing I hate is when it's cloudy in trees, the images are blurry. Lower F would make it better.

> (F2 lets 4x more light in than F4 , most compacts of this kind have a max aperture of 3.3 to 3.9)

Correct.

> F2 means that half of the available light hits the sensor, at F4 it is a quarter so it is F 1/2 or F1/4...

Not exactly. By that reasoning a f/0.95 lens from Voigtlander ($1,000) or Leica ($11,000) would capture more light than is actually present.

An aperture of f/2 means that the effective diameter of the lens is half the focal length (diameter = f/2 where f = focal length). A 200 mm telephoto with a 100 mm aperture, or a 6 mm P&S with a 3 mm aperture, would each be f/2 and would let in the same amount of light.

Yes mine was a bit of a lazy explanation...however "A 200 mm telephoto with a 100 mm aperture, or a 6 mm P&S with a 3 mm aperture, would each be f/2 and would let in the same amount of light."That is the theory explained on the net. In practice it does not work like that. Lets say that that your scene has a light value of EV 12. That is F1 at 1/1000th or F5,6 at 1/125 and so on.Now regardless of the lens you have you need a certain amount of light that corresponds to the above values to get that "correct" exposure.Size will not give you that. The exact amount of light that hits the film/sensor is determined by the type of glass , the coating and the design (number and type of elements) used .So the relationship between the focal length and the aperture is a start but not the full story.Note how a bunch of full size (35mm) 50mm F1.8 or for that matter a bunch of 200mm F4 will look physically different, They neither have the same front element size nor are 50mm or 200mm long.If by aperture what is meant is the size of the aperture blades, that does not work either because that needs to take into account the ammount of light that reaches the blades and the ammount of light lost after that because of different type of glass/coating and elements design on the rear elements.See in the below link the Fuji 55mmF2.2 aginst the Auto Takumar F2.2.I can safly assume that the Super Takumar has better coatings and glass than the Fuji however as you can see the front element is larger ...FrancoSee a larger size here :http://www.flickr.com/photos/norm_p/2658354826/sizes/l/in/photostream/Compare the sizes of the Pentacon 1.8 50mm with the Canon 1.8 50mm (on the far left)Also the Super Takumar 551.8 with the Fuji 55 1.8 as well as the Fuji F2.2 with the auto Takumar 55 F2.2

Much later...Today DPReview mentioned some new Zeiss Lense that have a T stop of 2.9...That reminded me of this thread...The T stop is the one where the formula mentioned by the previous poster works because it does not take into account light loss due to different coating and elements and so on...

Back in college physics class, they taught us how and why a good lens looks either brown or blue-green when you look into it. It has to do with the types of anti-reflective coatings and their thickness (it's an optical thing). I always found that fascinating. Beginners look at a lens and see the brown or blue thing and believe that it is a defect. If you look out through the same lens, it is clear. Oh, well.

A blue tinge is a dead giveaway that it is just single coated.Multiple colours means multi coating but quantity is not always quality either.If you get the chance, pick up a piece of High Density glass and a standard piece of optical glass and you will find the former to be a lot heavier but it does let more light through..(that is one reason why top lenses as well as good binos are heavy )Franco

How would this compare to something like the Canon s90? I have a s90 and an older olympus 720sw. The 720sw takes poor pictures perticularly at low light, but since most of my trips include rain and water crossings it goes with me more often than not because it is waterproof.

The only comparison shots I have seen so far don't look that good... In spite of the 2 stop gain in ISO and the almost 2 stop wider aperture the Pana TS4 still produced cleaner low light shots.But sooner or later DPReview will do a test and that will allow a better comparison with other cameras like the s90.(DPReview (top menu bar) Reviews Studio Comparison Tool )Franco

You can use the Imaging Resources Comparator tool to compare the Oly TG-1 with the Pany TS4. Scroll down the images to Still-life 1600. Click on the image twice to see full size and center on the top of the tallest bottle. Scroll around and draw your own conclusions.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

Suprisingly the TG-1 provides no in-camera JPEG adjustments such Sharpness, Color, Saturation or Noise reduction. Only thing you can adjust is White Balance and JPEG Compression. All other JPEG adjustment must be done in postprocessing.

BTW, I received my FCON lens w/adapter, a CP filter and 40m Underwater case today so I am all set for my dive trip this Saturday. You can see the TG-1 underwater possibilities here: http://fotopus.com/marine/impre/tg1+pt_053/index.html

Thanks RickKind of mixed results there (lots of colour fringing in the BW resolution shots but much better in colour)The one I had seen was this :http://www.digitalversus.com/digital-camera/face-off/12688.html

UW shots.Just amazing...I used to sell Nikonos stuff.Heavy and expensive and you never knew if you captured anything at all...Franco

Just came back from scenic Tateyama in the Japan Alps to catch the Fall colors. You can see some pics here,

http://flic.kr/s/aHsjCmKJJ1

I have the complete TG1 kit including both TCON and FCON lenses, as well as the 40m underwater housing.

Regarding the camera's operation, I am quite suprised how rare the camera's various exposure programs make use of the F2.0 aperture, considering its touted as THE primary feature. Looking back thru all 760+ pics I have taken so far, from 20m underwater to blazing sunlight I found only 3 taken @ F2.0!

While the exposure programs generally try to maintain a low ISO, it seems that they prefer to stop down the lens in normal light rather than increase shutter speed for correct exposure. The fastest shutter speed I've gotten is 1/800sec, almost 2 stops slower than the 1/2000sec spec. Strange in that these small lenses are best used wide open and apertures smaller than F4 usually cause diffraction issues with these small pixels. It really is too bad the camera allows for no real control of its exposure values.

FWIW, a few features I've come to like while hiking are the camera's HDR, Panorama, and its uncannily smart use of fill flash. The GPS, barometer, altimeter and compass are also very helpful. I have still not tried any of the Magic filters

The camera can definitely take nice pics, especially for web or monitor display, both indoors with its Low Light mode and out. That said, if you never see yourself using this camera in or underwater I would consider another camera. But being waterproof does open up lots of creative perspective opportunities.

The F2 is only available at 25mm, that is at the widest setting.Like most compact cameras as soon as you zoom, even a litle bit, the apertures drops.So the widest aperture available is F2 at 25mm slowing down to a max of F4.9 at 100mmAs a comparison the Canon S110 is F2 at 24mm but F5.9 at 120mm

Understood Franco. BUT even at widest angle (25mm) the exposure program will choose F8 @ ISO100 more often than not in normal daylight. Sometimes even F11! Meanwhile shutter speed will still be as low as 1/250sec. Brightest aperture at widest angle seems to be F2.8 at say 1/800sec ISO100 in good light. Seems F2 is only used in dim indoor light.

That would be a good indication that either the lens is not that good at F2 or simply the programmers are opting for a slightly greater depth of field to avoid out of focus images.You will find that many compacts have a bias (on auto) towards or away from a particular aperture

I just had a look at a night time street shot taken with the Canon S110 at the widest setting on auto, the aperture was 3.5this shot :